From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail190.messagelabs.com (mail190.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0533F6B0082 for ; Sun, 31 May 2009 23:06:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.74]) by fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id n5136jgF020676 for (envelope-from kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com); Mon, 1 Jun 2009 12:06:45 +0900 Received: from smail (m4 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 909BD45DE70 for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2009 12:06:45 +0900 (JST) Received: from s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.94]) by m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CE1445DE6E for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2009 12:06:45 +0900 (JST) Received: from s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FDE11DB8043 for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2009 12:06:45 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.103]) by s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B6131DB803B for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2009 12:06:45 +0900 (JST) From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [PATCH] readahead:add blk_run_backing_dev In-Reply-To: <20090601030249.GA10348@localhost> References: <6.0.0.20.2.20090601115104.0739dac0@172.19.0.2> <20090601030249.GA10348@localhost> Message-Id: <20090601120524.4F5A.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 12:06:44 +0900 (JST) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Wu Fengguang Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, Hisashi Hifumi , Andrew Morton , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "jens.axboe@oracle.com" List-ID: > > >> >I mean, you should get >300MB/s throughput with 7 disks, and you > > >> >should seek ways to achieve that before testing out this patch :-) > > >> > > >> Throughput number of storage array is very from one product to another. > > >> On my hardware environment I think this number is valid and > > >> my patch is effective. > > > > > >What's your readahead size? Is it large enough to cover the stripe width? > > > > Do you mean strage's readahead size? > > What's strage? I mean if your RAID's block device file is /dev/sda, then I guess it's typo :-) but I recommend he use sane test environment... > > blockdev --getra /dev/sda > > will tell its readahead size in unit of 512 bytes. > > Thanks, > Fengguang > -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org